29er vs 26er Test...- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 40 of 40
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MtbGeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    25

    29er vs 26er Test...

    One of my friends with a Ventana FS 29er asked me a few weeks ago to run a test to see whether the 29er was faster than a 26er over a short course. We rounded up 5 riders for the test all who have different strengths. The owner of the bike also has a Blur LT (26lb) and ran both bikes during the test.

    We ran the test at Schaeffer farm park in Germantown Md. For those familar with the area it was part of the white loop -> orange ->white and back to the parking lot running clockwise. The course was short, probably a little over a mile and had a combination of log crossings, tight single track, fast straight sections with roots, sweeping fast turns and a small but steep climb towards the end.

    We started out doing a warmup lap to get everyone familiar with the course and then ran the test. Each of us ran at least 4 laps, 2 with our bike and 2 with the 29er. Guess what? The test was conclusive. It didn't make a difference. The 29er seemed faster on the straights and went over stuff easier but didn't make up the difference on the tight single track sections or the climbs.

    Everyone liked the bike, it was set to 5in of travel in the back with a Fox RP23 set on Pro Pedal 2 and had a White Bros fork with 107mm of travel in the front. The bike is light at 26lb (I believe the lightest of the group) running Stans NoTubes on Stans Olympic rims (read light!). Believe me, the owner is a weight weenie.

    I attached the results as an XLS file for those geeky enough to care. Overall we had a blast doing it.

    Let the flames begin...
    Attached Files Attached Files

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,330
    Do you realise, if you work out a average time for 26" and 29" the 29" is faster


    26" Average 10:49
    29" Average 10:25

    Not huge but factor in, this is achieved not on there own bike and a new wheel format so you'd expect them to knock some more time off that

    29ers ROCK baby.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,330
    Ohhh I see, you've screwed up your averaged

  4. #4
    Birthday Collector
    Reputation: ATBScott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,604
    I think that one of the most interesting things is that in every case, the rider was noticeably faster on the 2nd lap of the 29'er, and in many cases, this was (or was at least very close to) their fastest lap... I think that if you took the same riders, gave them a 29'er to ride for a month, and repeated the test it would fail because none of them would want to ride the 26" for the test! Just kidding (a little). The 29'er would probably be even faster as the riders were more used to them and negotiating tight sections a bit better. While I still think that for hucking and some cases of extreme riding because of lateral wheel load that a 26" may be superior in those situations, I find that I can ride my 29" faster just about everywhere now. And it is rigid. Once I get a 4+ inch travel 29", I am sure there will be no comparison except maybe in extremely tight switchbacks, and I'll live with that!
    R.I.P. Corky 10/97-4/09
    Disclaimer: I sell and repair bikes for a living


  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,395

    Heh

    Quote Originally Posted by MtbGeek
    One of my friends with a Ventana FS 29er asked me a few weeks ago to run a test to see whether the 29er was faster than a 26er over a short course. We rounded up 5 riders for the test all who have different strengths. The owner of the bike also has a Blur LT (26lb) and ran both bikes during the test.

    We ran the test at Schaeffer farm park in Germantown Md. For those familar with the area it was part of the white loop -> orange ->white and back to the parking lot running clockwise. The course was short, probably a little over a mile and had a combination of log crossings, tight single track, fast straight sections with roots, sweeping fast turns and a small but steep climb towards the end.

    We started out doing a warmup lap to get everyone familiar with the course and then ran the test. Each of us ran at least 4 laps, 2 with our bike and 2 with the 29er. Guess what? The test was conclusive. It didn't make a difference. The 29er seemed faster on the straights and went over stuff easier but didn't make up the difference on the tight single track sections or the climbs.

    Everyone liked the bike, it was set to 5in of travel in the back with a Fox RP23 set on Pro Pedal 2 and had a White Bros fork with 107mm of travel in the front. The bike is light at 26lb (I believe the lightest of the group) running Stans NoTubes on Stans Olympic rims (read light!). Believe me, the owner is a weight weenie.

    I attached the results as an XLS file for those geeky enough to care. Overall we had a blast doing it.

    Let the flames begin...

    Schaeffer isn't exactly the place where I would expect a 29er to shine. Go up to the 'shed on some of those rocks and see what the numbers are like.

  6. #6
    DWF
    DWF is offline
    Non Dual Bliss
    Reputation: DWF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,240
    Fastest time for each rider was on a 26" bike save one who was 1 second faster on the 29er.

    That's the beauty of data: it's all in the interpretation.
    A man must have enemies and places he is not welcome. In the end we are not only defined by our friends but those against us.

  7. #7
    Birthday Collector
    Reputation: ATBScott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,604
    I said it was, or was CLOSE TO the fastest lap. After a warm-up lap (bike not noted) that was very slow in most cases, the riders set or approached the fastest lap on their 2nd lap on a bike that they were not "used to". I think that says a lot! Give 'em a month...
    R.I.P. Corky 10/97-4/09
    Disclaimer: I sell and repair bikes for a living


  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vecsus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,811
    It would be interesting to run the same test at Fountainhead. Doing 4+ laps would be tiring so you might need to spread the test out over a few sessions.

    For me (and, I believe, many other 29er owners) it's more than just an issue of raw numbers. I am simply more comfortable on my 29er. Even if it adds 5 minutes to a loop at Shaeffer I would still ride one. It would just mean I am having 5 more minutes of fun. Then again, I don't race so I'm not looking for ways to finish the ride faster.
    Vecsus

    HTFU or STFU

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    636
    Quote Originally Posted by DWF
    Fastest time for each rider was on a 26" bike save one who was 1 second faster on the 29er.

    That's the beauty of data: it's all in the interpretation.
    Two people appeared to have faster recorded times on the 29er, Rob and Jim. Although Rob's is in question due to being held up on a 26er for 10-20 seconds?

    So, I got 2 things out of it: It was a nearly insignificant difference in times on this course that may have a bigger effect on a longer course, and Rob (?-I think, the guy with the Blur LT) made the rest of you look like candy asses .

    It's actually a pretty decent test. The other bikes are good designs so you can't give Ventana's engineering sole credit. I also thought it was interesting how the 2nd attempt on the 29 was better than the first attempt so there may be a comfort factor there.

  10. #10
    Torque me. Make me spin!
    Reputation: BottomBraket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    69

    Go ride 10 bikes 10 ten times each. Buy the one that feels good

    I was one of the riders on this endeavor. I can not even call it a test. The data is very limited (5 riders with two trials on their own 26er and two trials on the same 29er Ventana El Rey). Due to the limited data, no statistically meaningful conclusion can be inferred. That being said here’s an attempt to pull something out of it.

    Since the data is limited, it maybe best to consider “best time” for each rider on the 29er and the 26er without averaging trials by the same rider (there’s only 2 data points here). Upon doing this, I see that the average times among the five riders on the bikes (5 data points for each bike type) are:

    26er- 10 min 5.2 sec (average of five samples, standard deviation 50.8 sec)
    29er- 10 min 5.0 sec (average of five samples, standard deviation 54.5 sec)

    The difference of 0.2 seconds is most likely insignificant!

    But I do have one gut feeling about the results. In a 1 mile time trial on mild single track, rider fitness, ability, and just generally how they’re feeling that day is more important than which bike they are riding.

    My conclusion: Go ride 10 bikes 10 ten times each. Buy the one that feels good.

  11. #11
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,717

    Didn't read the data, but...

    Did you take a survey of how much fun the rider had on the 29er compared to the 26er?

    Unless you're racing for money, that is the real test.

    Personally, I'd rather go slower and enjoy the ride more than go fast and not, although faster often equals more fun.

    I've ridden a few 5-6" travel bikes, and most of the time, I feel like that much suspension takes away from some of the fun, for example. I may be faster on the downs and rough stuff, but it may not be as fun to ride as my rigid 29er.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MtbGeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    25
    These are my impressions...

    The ride was overall smoother. But not necessarily as fun because I love the hair raising experience of riding/bouncing my rigid 26er single speed fast over nasty rooted sections. It is fun to try to keep up with the 6in travel guys on the downhills!

    The 29er rolled over things better (duh). So I felt faster on the straight sections even if there were a lot of roots/logs. The suspension was very plush, much more so than my bike. Most of this is probably the 5th Element Air rear shock on the Blur which isn't nearly as plush as the Fox.

    The bike didn't turn nearly as fast through tight singletrack. I had to slow down more to feel confident around the turns.

    Climbing/Accelerating took more energy but once up to speed held the speed easier (like the final straight).

    Cornering was not as secure especially on the long sweeper in the field (which had loose dirt). This could have been the tires or maybe that the 29er didn't drift the way I am used to with the Blur (maybe more traction on the 29er?)

    So for the type of riding that I like (tight fast single-track) with lots of climbs, I would never switch bikes. Add to the fact that I would have to buy another bike...tt is not going to happen any time soon. And If someone (Gary) asked me today whether I would trade my Blur LT for a the El Ray I would have to say no. I also rode the 29er the previous week for about 2 hours of pavement/dirt. I felt the same way.

  13. #13
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by MtbGeek
    These are my impressions...

    The ride was overall smoother. But not necessarily as fun because I love the hair raising experience of riding/bouncing my rigid 26er single speed fast over nasty rooted sections. It is fun to try to keep up with the 6in travel guys on the downhills!

    The 29er rolled over things better (duh). So I felt faster on the straight sections even if there were a lot of roots/logs. The suspension was very plush, much more so than my bike. Most of this is probably the 5th Element Air rear shock on the Blur which isn't nearly as plush as the Fox.

    The bike didn't turn nearly as fast through tight singletrack. I had to slow down more to feel confident around the turns.

    Climbing/Accelerating took more energy but once up to speed held the speed easier (like the final straight).

    Cornering was not as secure especially on the long sweeper in the field (which had loose dirt). This could have been the tires or maybe that the 29er didn't drift the way I am used to with the Blur (maybe more traction on the 29er?)

    So for the type of riding that I like (tight fast single-track) with lots of climbs, I would never switch bikes. Add to the fact that I would have to buy another bike...tt is not going to happen any time soon. And If someone (Gary) asked me today whether I would trade my Blur LT for a the El Ray I would have to say no. I also rode the 29er the previous week for about 2 hours of pavement/dirt. I felt the same way.
    Many of your negatives I would put down mostly to not being familiar with the bike. I have similar "issues" every time I get a new bike or go back to an old bike after being off it for a while.

    I need to toss my 6" fully (26") into corners harder than my rigid 29er which needs to be tossed more than my 26" hardtail. All corner very well in their own way. Each feels awkward for a while if I have not ridden it in a month or so. Each bike will also do things the other two will not.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  14. #14
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,717

    It has to be because...

    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    Many of your negatives I would put down mostly to not being familiar with the bike. I have similar "issues" every time I get a new bike or go back to an old bike after being off it for a while.

    I need to toss my 6" fully (26") into corners harder than my rigid 29er which needs to be tossed more than my 26" hardtail. All corner very well in their own way. Each feels awkward for a while if I have not ridden it in a month or so. Each bike will also do things the other two will not.
    ... of the green paint? Shig, you finally run out of that stuff?

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,250

    These test are all subjective BS.....

    I did the same test around two years ago...posted the results here - you could probably find them in a search.

    Test was my light weight race bike 26" Turner Flux - around 23lbs
    29er was a newly purchased heavy Asylum - weight was close to 28+lbs

    In the end the Asylum was MUCH faster than the 26". From what I remember over a 25 minute lap, the Asylum 29er was faster by 2-3 minutes each time.

    I had planned on running the test 3 times (6 total laps) that day......after the 2nd time I just packed up the 26" bike and went our riding the 29er as a 3rd time was just going to waste my time.

    again, its all subjective though.
    Michael
    www.MLKimages.com


    Quote Originally Posted by MtbGeek
    One of my friends with a Ventana FS 29er asked me a few weeks ago to run a test to see whether the 29er was faster than a 26er over a short course. We rounded up 5 riders for the test all who have different strengths. The owner of the bike also has a Blur LT (26lb) and ran both bikes during the test.

    We ran the test at Schaeffer farm park in Germantown Md. For those familar with the area it was part of the white loop -> orange ->white and back to the parking lot running clockwise. The course was short, probably a little over a mile and had a combination of log crossings, tight single track, fast straight sections with roots, sweeping fast turns and a small but steep climb towards the end.

    We started out doing a warmup lap to get everyone familiar with the course and then ran the test. Each of us ran at least 4 laps, 2 with our bike and 2 with the 29er. Guess what? The test was conclusive. It didn't make a difference. The 29er seemed faster on the straights and went over stuff easier but didn't make up the difference on the tight single track sections or the climbs.

    Everyone liked the bike, it was set to 5in of travel in the back with a Fox RP23 set on Pro Pedal 2 and had a White Bros fork with 107mm of travel in the front. The bike is light at 26lb (I believe the lightest of the group) running Stans NoTubes on Stans Olympic rims (read light!). Believe me, the owner is a weight weenie.

    I attached the results as an XLS file for those geeky enough to care. Overall we had a blast doing it.

    Let the flames begin...

  16. #16
    Captain Underpants
    Reputation: Random Drivel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,278

    thanks

    Quote Originally Posted by MtbGeek
    So for the type of riding that I like (tight fast single-track) with lots of climbs, I would never switch bikes. Add to the fact that I would have to buy another bike...tt is not going to happen any time soon. And If someone (Gary) asked me today whether I would trade my Blur LT for a the El Ray I would have to say no. I also rode the 29er the previous week for about 2 hours of pavement/dirt. I felt the same way.
    Hey, you know what, I liked your initial post. Have not looked at you data yet, but will.

    29ers are not for everyone. You are happy with your 26er, that is great.

    But ride one for a month, and I'm guessing you might form a different conclusion. I am noticeably faster on mine, to the point my friends cannot keep up with me on the flats.

  17. #17
    Recovering couch patato
    Reputation: Cloxxki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,017
    Great effort!

    Next time, it would be good to use each other's 26"bikes when testing against an unfamiliar 29"er.

    If a foreign 29"is already about as fast as a personal 26"er after only a couple of miles, that's quite comforting for those considering a 29" purchase.

    It's so easy to critisize a test, but so hard to get something done yourself.

    I'd like to see (do?) a roll-test. Downhill course that only requires braking. No chain used on the test. Same gravity settings. Same tires, except for bead diameter.

  18. #18

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    110
    I completely disagree.

    I've got a Ventana Salty 26er and an Ventana El Rey 29er, both are set up practically identical with components, as close as possible as you can get the Geo specs (saddle height & position, proper stem lengths considerations for the handling characteristics of each bike, gearing considerations for the 29er wheels compared to the 26er, etc.) and both weigh in a 28.4lbs Salty and 28.8lbs El Rey.

    I've ran my own time test on the same trail riding both bikes on the same day and on alternating days where I only rode one bike for that day's time test. I've ran these test for an entire month, four rides each week.

    Every timed ride gave the same results, the El Rey 29er smoked the Salty 26er on timed loops.

    But I don't think a 29er is better than a 26er, each wheel size does different things better than the other... I think it really boils down to what you're trying to do with the bike and the wheel size it rolls on. I prefer my 29er for speed, but I'll take my 26er when I want to goof off more.
    Last edited by Scots; 10-25-2007 at 01:01 AM.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flat Ark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,645
    As far as which platform is fastest, I believe that 99% of the time the rider with the bigger engine is going to be faster no matter what he/she is on. I went to a race this past weekend and the guys that were winning on 29ers were also winning in years previous on 26ers. There were also guys winning there classes on 26ers. FS or HT didn't seem to matter much either. I witnessed guys absolutely flying on all sorts of bikes. I also saw a lot of $5000+ carbon bikes with the latest and greatest of everything bringing up the rear. I guess the point that I am trying to make is that both 29er and 26er or FS vs HT has there advantages in given situations, but if you truly want to get faster TRAIN HARDER.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ernesto_from_Wisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,006
    one day I looked at a 26" and then a 29er. I thought the 29er's wheels were bigger. They also hold more air because I did a valve release test, and yes, 29er wheels hold more air.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MtbGeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    25

    Hey, this was just for fun!

    The bottom line is that I agreed to do the test because I was curious what would happen while being as objective as possible. By running the same course back to back on the same day on different bikes I could get some general impressions. I certainly am making no claim about whether one bike is better than another. But for me the Blur is more fun and just as fast. JUST FOR ME!

    Gary rides the Ventana regularly and loves it. He was the one who was most curious because he also owns a Blur LT which weighs about the same (26lb). On the course his times were very consistent but was faster on the Blur. Not by a significant amount but still faster.

    The 29er tires do hold more air and the air and has a better scent...

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    409
    Quote Originally Posted by Scots
    I completely disagree.

    I've got a Ventana Salty 26er and an Ventana El Rey 29er, both are set up practically identical with components, as close as possible as you can get the Geo specs (saddle height & position, proper stem lengths considerations for the handling characteristics of each bike, gearing considerations for the 29er wheels compared to the 26er, etc.) and both weigh in a 28.4lbs Salty and 28.8lbs El Rey.

    I've ran my own time test on the same trail riding both bikes on the same day and on alternating days where I only rode one bike for that day's time test. I've ran these test for an entire month, four rides each week.

    Every timed ride gave the same results, the El Rey 29er smoked the Salty 26er on timed loops.

    But I don't think a 29er is better than a 26er, each wheel size does different things better than the other... I think it really boils down to what you're trying to do with the bike and the wheel size it rolls on. I prefer my 29er for speed, but I'll take my 26er when I want to goof off more.
    One thing that i noticed on our local trails between 26" and 29ers is that i am not wasting as much energy on the 29er - yes it does roll over everything better and the traction on the RIP9 is great, not that i am much faster on the 29er but i have more energy left over, also my legs dont seem to burn out as fast - both wheel sizes have there place on any trail, it all depends on what you want to do. For me i must admit that i wanted to see what all the hype was about, i rode a sultan for a brief time and really liked it. I would see all these guys on 29er rigids, hard tails, FS and they were just blowing by me on my X5 or Hammerhead 100 so i took the plunge - i really do like it, there is a bit of a learning curve ( for me anyway ) i dont know for sure about one being faster than the other but i can tell you this - at the end of my ride on the 29er i felt better, was not as tired and my legs and lower back all felt better than they did after a long ride on the 26er

  23. #23
    drev-il, not Dr. Evil!
    Reputation: Drevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,907
    If I'm thinking of the correct route, there's a 2' log in the middle of the Orange trail. Did you find it easier, harder, or no different to get over it on the 29er?
    "Keep your burgers lean and your tires fat." -h.d. | ssoft | flickr

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: edouble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,672

    I dont ride fully rigid ..

    ( ht w/sus. fork) but I couldnt agree more with this statement, especially for xc, by pimpbot. "Personally, I'd rather go slower and enjoy the ride more than go fast and not, although faster often equals more fun.
    I've ridden a few 5-6" travel bikes, and most of the time, I feel like that much suspension takes away from some of the fun".
    EAST COAST
    CLYDESDALE
    DREADLOCKED
    STEEL RIDER

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MtbGeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Drevil
    If I'm thinking of the correct route, there's a 2' log in the middle of the Orange trail. Did you find it easier, harder, or no different to get over it on the 29er?
    I walked/ran over that one, didn't ride it on either bike. There is something about the dropoff which spooks me enough to not do that one

    I can do the next big one on that loop which I believe is the same size, but didn't try either during this test. Didn't want the crash to sway the times or hurt my already chipped shoulder. One of these days I will get Gary to loan me the bike for the "29er vs 26er hop over the big log" test...

  26. #26
    drev-il, not Dr. Evil!
    Reputation: Drevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,907

    Wink

    Bored today so I figured I'd give this a shot. I've been riding 29ers 99.99% of the time for the last 2.5 years. I only had one 26er still built up, so it'd have to do.

    Tale of the Tape
    29er:
    2007 Jamis Exile 29er with rigid fork
    30x17 gearing fixie, 170mm cranks
    24.5 pounds

    26er:

    1994 Fat City Yo Eddy with rigid fork
    32x17 gearing fixie, 175mm cranks
    19.5 pounds

    Results
    29er time. 26er time.

    Conclusion
    I like to ride bikes:





    "Keep your burgers lean and your tires fat." -h.d. | ssoft | flickr

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MtbGeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    25

    Good job! Ya, bikes are fun...

    Nice ride! 9:25 is an awesome time for a rigid fixie! Did you feel any faster on the 29er?

    How much rest time did you give yourself between laps? And did you ride over "the log"? It was cool to see the MotionBased track at 1.9 miles. I figured it was more like 1.5. I gots to get one of those toys, my GPS just died.

    Next time let me know if you are going to run some laps. I live in Germantown so Schaeffer is almost in my backyard (actually BHs is my backyard). I would have come over to try again on my SS (heavy ~24-25lb rigid Zion EBB 26er, 34x18 with Rhino rims).

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    266
    People are stupid to be comparing 29ers to 26ers in 2007. If you are under 5 8" then a 26er. Over then a 29er. I say under 5 8" then 26er because you are to short. Its 2007, everyone knows 29ers are faster. PLEASE STOP COMPAREING THE TWO AND JUST BUY A 29ER!!

  29. #29
    drev-il, not Dr. Evil!
    Reputation: Drevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,907
    Quote Originally Posted by mboeder
    People are stupid to be comparing 29ers to 26ers in 2007. If you are under 5 8" then a 26er. Over then a 29er. I say under 5 8" then 26er because you are to short. Its 2007, everyone knows 29ers are faster. PLEASE STOP COMPAREING THE TWO AND JUST BUY A 29ER!!
    Please, please, please, if you are going to call anyone stupid, check your spelling!

    So 4'10" (5 8") is the minimum height to join the 29er club?
    "Keep your burgers lean and your tires fat." -h.d. | ssoft | flickr

  30. #30
    (was) Big in Japan
    Reputation: TheSingleGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,008

    Yeah, but you wear funny hats...

    Quote Originally Posted by Drevil
    Please, please, please, if you are going to call anyone stupid, check your spelling!

    So 4'10" (5 8") is the minimum height to join the 29er club?
    Drevil, if you are designating yourself MTBR SPELLING POLICE you are going to be one busy man!

    Goode lukk wif thet.

    Nice motion based post too - that's rad.
    Ride.

  31. #31
    drev-il, not Dr. Evil!
    Reputation: Drevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,907
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSingleGuy
    Drevil, if you are designating yourself MTBR SPELLING POLICE you are going to be one busy man!

    Goode lukk wif thet.

    Nice motion based post too - that's rad.
    Nope, not at all. Just poking fun.

    BTW, the layouts of the bikes are very different. They were built up the way I like(d) them, and the 26er's bars are at least 2" lower than the saddle. Kinda scary because it felt like I was going to go over the bars when getting over logs. I wish I could get my 29er bars a little lower (I think the saddle and bars are about even), but ultimately I got that ol' "in" the bike feel on the 29er vs "on top" of the bike on the 26er.

    BEFORE ANYONE HAS A COW, I WILL ADD "FOR ME" AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE!!! When I say "29er" that means my Jamis and the way it is set up. When I say "26er" I mean my Fat City and the way it is currently set up.

    FOR ME, the 29er felt more stable and deflected less off of little things. FOR ME, it didn't turn as quickly, which I have grown used to since I've been riding 29ers almost exclusively for the last 2.5 years. FOR ME, I prefer it now.

    FOR ME, the 26er responded to handlebar input more quickly. FOR ME, it was a little scary.

    So depending on what adjectives you want to use, the 26er felt more twitchy/fast-steering and telepathic/nervous FOR ME FOR ME FOR ME!!! FOR ME, I think I'll stick with 29ers, FOR ME!
    "Keep your burgers lean and your tires fat." -h.d. | ssoft | flickr

  32. #32
    drev-il, not Dr. Evil!
    Reputation: Drevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,907
    Quote Originally Posted by MtbGeek
    Nice ride! 9:25 is an awesome time for a rigid fixie! Did you feel any faster on the 29er?

    How much rest time did you give yourself between laps? And did you ride over "the log"? It was cool to see the MotionBased track at 1.9 miles. I figured it was more like 1.5. I gots to get one of those toys, my GPS just died.

    Next time let me know if you are going to run some laps. I live in Germantown so Schaeffer is almost in my backyard (actually BHs is my backyard). I would have come over to try again on my SS (heavy ~24-25lb rigid Zion EBB 26er, 34x18 with Rhino rims).
    Feel faster? I don't think so. I felt faster on the 26er, but I think of it like this: in my wife's 13-year old rinky dink Toyota Tercel, at 60mph, the car is rattling and shimmying with the wind whooshing really loudly, and you feel like you're going really fast. In my dad's month-old Acura Somethingorother, at 90mph, it's quiet and you don't feel like you are going that fast. In this case, the 29er is like the Acura.

    I probably rested about 10 minutes as some friends were giving me a hard time about bringing two bikes out to the trail

    On the orange connector there are two good-sized logs. When going clockwise, the first one is slightly built up, and I rode that with both bikes. The second one, no way, not on a fixie A few years ago I almost bit completely through my upper lip when I crashed on my face on one of those loops. Wifey would not approve of more face-scarring.
    "Keep your burgers lean and your tires fat." -h.d. | ssoft | flickr

  33. #33
    MTB Rider
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    3,004
    Quote Originally Posted by Drevil
    Feel faster? I don't think so. I felt faster on the 26er, but I think of it like this: in my wife's 13-year old rinky dink Toyota Tercel, at 60mph, the car is rattling and shimmying with the wind whooshing really loudly, and you feel like you're going really fast. In my dad's month-old Acura Somethingorother, at 90mph, it's quiet and you don't feel like you are going that fast. In this case, the 29er is like the Acura.
    Excellent point Drivel (sp?) I think a lot of people "feel" the irregularities in the trail, then when they get on a 29er, it goes away so they "feel" slower. I also think that you have to put more into a 29er steerer. It doesn't make it "turn slower". It means it handles differently.

  34. #34
    highly visible
    Reputation: GlowBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,206
    Quote Originally Posted by mboeder
    I say under 5 8" then 26er because you are to [sic] short.
    Really? There's a magic cutoff? Above which everyone should ride a 29"er, and below which everyone should ride a 26"er?

    Good to know, 'cuz I've got some sellin' to do! I'd better start getting ready to sell all three of my 29"ers, because at 5'6.5" I am an inch and a half too short for them. D8mn.
    "People like GloyBoy are deaf. They are partisan, intellectually lazy & usually very angry." -Jaybo

  35. #35
    (was) Big in Japan
    Reputation: TheSingleGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Drevil
    Nope, not at all. Just poking fun.
    Guess I should have used some smilies....
    Ride.

  36. #36
    drev-il, not Dr. Evil!
    Reputation: Drevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,907
    Finally got the Motionbased Dot Racing to work, but only on Internet Explorer 7 on a pc. Pretty neato:
    http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/a...364336,4364337

    I think where I first open a gap on myself is a tight gravelly right turn, then I go through a rooty section.
    "Keep your burgers lean and your tires fat." -h.d. | ssoft | flickr

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,780
    @Drevil I cannot view it can you please upload it to be compatible with IE 6 and XP?

  38. #38
    Steel and teeth.
    Reputation: b1umb0y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    577
    Quote Originally Posted by Davidcopperfield
    @Drevil I cannot view it can you please upload it to be compatible with IE 6 and XP?
    I would also like it in Solaris and Netscape v.2 if you have it. Also Irix 6.5.20 so to play it on my Onyx workstation.

    Thanks!

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MtbGeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Drevil
    Finally got the Motionbased Dot Racing to work, but only on Internet Explorer 7 on a pc. Pretty neato:
    http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/a...364336,4364337

    I think where I first open a gap on myself is a tight gravelly right turn, then I go through a rooty section.
    Cool stuff even though I can't seem to open it up with IE7. The main window is blank?

    I had a little difficulty with the 29er through the gravely section (maybe too much grip?), the 26er was more easy to drift. This is probably just lack of riding experience with the 29er.

    The following rooty section was much less painful on the 29er.

  40. #40

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    770
    Test is interesting and cool, but to draw conclusive results is iffy and then generalize conclusions from a very very tiny amount of data is blasphemous, any statistician would agree. The bikes are not the same, the components are not the same, heck you could have made it into a test of which suspension fork is better or which crank is better, accurate and reliable tests are made by changing one variable at a time while leaving all others constant per test. But, at least you have some sort of quantitative data, ie, time. So, in the end nice job!

    P.S.
    Bike magazine bike tests are so subjective and lame. So worthless, your test is by far better!

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.